How can Art of Hosting help us have difficult conversations around oppression?
This was the question I asked during March's Art of Hosting training, and I'd like to keep the conversation going here. So, what do you think?
Some interesting insights from the initial conversation:
- What are the minimum conditions we can all meet to move forward with the conversation? What does that mean for an oppressed/oppressor-dynamic?
- Balance power. Acknowledge the privilege in the room to create a safe space.
- Promote resilience when calling conversations between oppressor and oppressed. How do I let you hurt me? Am I willing to get hurt to have this discussion in order to get you to stop hurting others?
- It's important to host one's self and their own marginalized community before stepping into hosting spaces that require vulnerability and inclusion of an oppressor-group.
Excited to hash this out some more!
Richard
Comments
Having difficult conversations around oppression
Thanks Richard for continuing this very important query.
I have found that conversations come about either without any previous planning, but they occur when words, gestures, dismissals, hit us and presents that opportunity to reflect.
in planned conversations we bring the advantage of preparation ahead of time.
Regardless, I find that when I speak from my heart, I can be candid without being hurtful, I am open to what/how others may express their convictions/perspectives. I am more forgiving and open to query about the others's motivation.
It is an exercise in discipline in which I am giving my human brother or sister the benefit of the doubt and the assumption that the effort is sincere.
Thanks for the response!
Thank you for that heartfelt, poignant response.
These two statements really hit me:
1. "I find that when I speak from my heart, I can be candid without being hurtful, I am open to what/how others may express their convictions/perspectives."
2. "It is an exercise in discipline in which I am giving my human brother or sister the benefit of the doubt and the assumption that the effort is sincere."
Speaking from the heart and exercising discipline in the benefit of the doubt -- a constant area of needed self-awareness and intention. I've found that my best conversations of growth (inwardly for myself and outwardly for others) have occurred precisely because I consciously or unconsciously exercised those two things.
I notice you're 'Anonymous' -- I'd love it if you created a profile so I can put a face to a name and stay connected in this great work!
Richard
"Minimal conditions"
I was in the small group that had this conversation with Richard, and I remember the idea of "minimal conditions" being introduced. It has really given me chewy food for thought. It both rocked my assumption that we have to have "safe" places in order to have good conversation, and affirmed what I have already experienced - that no place is every fully "safe."
To describe the idea a little further: We can't create and GUARANTEE a space that fulfills everyone's individual definition of safety - it will always be uncomfortable (if people w/ differences are sharing them honestly),and it may be threatening (if one person's heart-felt truth is the denial of another's experience). Particularly when people are sharing from their differences, different language might unintentionally offend, or hurt someone.
Given this assumption, how can we set the minimal conditions that will allow people to participate as fully as they can? Said another way, how can we acknowledge this difficulty with "safety" and have a very diverse group of people get together and talk productively? How can the bar be set low enough that most diverse group can gather (and remember, a diverse group is messy and unintentionally hurts each other), and yet have enough basic conditions for respect and civility and purpose to move the conversation forward? How do we acknowledge and deal with different kinds of power and different levels of power in the room?
This kind of honest, somewhat scary edge, is where I find promise for different solutions and processes.
Minimal conditions
The idea of "minimal conditions" and no such thing as a safe space were challenging for me as well. I thought it was interesting when this was brought up in conjunction with the question "how much am I willing to let you hurt me?" In this context, it seems like one of the minimal conditions is honesty and transparency about the potential to be hurt. Apart from that, minimal conditions seems like a really important concept but something that I have no idea how to implement.
Post new comment